reply to each post with 100 words as if you are me and reply hello (person name)
post 1
Haley Rankin posted May 12, 2024 11:44 AM
Good Afternoon Professor and Class,
I examined a few different tests for personality testing but ultimately my reading led me to the Rorschach test. The Rorschach test was introduced as a test for personality and psychology in the 1930’s. The examinee is presented cards with either black and white or colored ink blots. Initially, the blots do not resemble anything specifically but the examinee is to tell the administrator what they see in the ink blot. One person may see a horse’s head, another person may see a car. The differences in how each person interprets the ink blots is the basis for the test. The examinees minds’ work to make sense of the ‘random’ image and that meaning is generated within their mind (Frothingham 2024). The test has categories for responses suchs as nature, animal, whole human, human feature, fictional or mythical, and sex. The patient could respond to features in the inkblot in categories such as: form, movement, color, shading, and pairs or reflections (Frothingham 2024).
If questioned as to why I chose this test method, I would explain that the subjective interpretation and unconscious aspect of this test gives more insight into a person than a more structured testing method. Also, the Rorschach test has been widely used for many decades in a vast array of clinical settings. This test has been scrutinized and its evaluation criteria have been refined many times since its inception.
To administer and analyze the test and results, a qualified psychologist or similar mental health professional is required. In many places in the world, administering the Rorschach test is regulated by laws and professional guidelines. Administrators need to not only collect the examinee’s responses to the inkblots but also note their body language, length of time needed before responding to the ink blot, and overall behavior during the test.
-Haley
Frothingham, M. B. (2024, January 19). Rorschach inkblot test: Definition, History & Interpretation. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/what-is-the-rorschach-inkblot-test.html
Part 2:
The aspects of psychological assessment that are the most appealing to me would be the classification of traits to get more specific, personality traits. How or why people behave or make choice has always been a point of interest for me. Due to my interest in personality traits, I would say that developmental testing is also as intriguing to me. Anything that pertains to how a person gets from A to B is fascinating to me. Based on those, the factors that I find most interesting about each are, like mentioned above, why do people behave in certain manners or make specific decisions. Some aspects of psychological assessment that I look forward to exploring are, exploring more within testing, I do like to stay in what I am more comfortable with and what seems interesting to me, but I do want to branch out and see what other types of assessment and testing there are, and research them.
Post 2
victoria davenport posted May 13, 2024 12:02 PM
Good afternoon class,
If I were tasked with recommending a new testing protocol to be incorporated into a primary assessment battery for intelligence and/or personality, I would thoroughly assess its psychometric properties to ensure its reliability and validity at assessor level A.
Firstly, I would examine the test’s reliability, focusing on internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Internal consistency indicates how consistently the items within the test measure the same construct. I would look for a high Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (Schrepp, 2020), indicating strong interrelatedness among the items. This ensures that the test consistently measures the targeted trait or ability. Additionally, test-retest reliability assesses the stability of scores over time. A high correlation coefficient between scores obtained from the same individuals on two separate occasions would demonstrate the test’s stability and reliability.
Secondly, I would evaluate the test’s validity, including content validity, criterion-related validity, and construct validity. Content validity ensures that the test adequately samples the domain of interest. I would review the test items to confirm that they cover a representative range of behaviors or characteristics related to intelligence or personality (Cuadrado, et al., 2021).
Criterion-related validity assesses the extent to which the test scores correlate with an external criterion. For instance, for a test of intelligence, I would examine its correlation with established intelligence measures to confirm its ability to predict academic or occupational success. Similarly, for a personality test, I would assess its correlation with criteria such as job performance or interpersonal relationships.
Construct validity is crucial for demonstrating that the test measures the theoretical construct it intends to assess. I would look for evidence supporting the test’s underlying theoretical framework through factor analysis or structural equation modeling. Additionally, convergent and discriminant validity analyses would help confirm that the test scores correlate strongly with measures of similar constructs and weakly with measures of unrelated constructs, respectively (Anglim, et al., 2022).
Furthermore, I would consider other relevant psychometric properties, such as standardization, norms, and sensitivity to cultural diversity. Standardization ensures consistent administration and scoring procedures, while norms provide comparative data for interpreting individual scores. Sensitivity to cultural diversity ensures that the test is applicable and fair across diverse populations, minimizing cultural bias.
In summary, when recommending a new testing protocol, I would prioritize thorough assessments of reliability and validity, supported by evidence from internal consistency, test-retest reliability, content validity, criterion-related validity, and construct validity analyses. Additionally, consideration of other psychometric properties and cultural sensitivity would further strengthen the defense of the test selection.
References
Anglim, J. et al., 2022. Personality and intelligence: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin.
Cuadrado, D., Salgado, J. & Moscoso, S., 2021. Personality, intelligence, and counterproductive academic behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Schrepp, M., 2020. On the Usage of Cronbach’s Alpha to Measure Reliability of UX Scales. Journal of Usability Studies.
post 3
Miranda Munoz posted May 13, 2024 2:17 PM
If I was being asked to recommend a new testing protocol as a part of a primary assessment battery to be used for measuring intelligence and/or personality I would choose, personality as I find this topic to be of more interest to me.
The test I would select for my decision would be,
Hare Psychopathy Checklist. The evidence I would use to support my decision would be, that it should be known that this test has been revised by the elimination of two questions, as they were shown to be unhelpful or did not yield the information that was needed. I have selected this test as I found that while it is a test composed in the 80’s it only went a revision of the elimination of two questions. I also figured that since this test was going to be part of primary assessment, that I was hoping to find a test that was assessor level C. This test is comprised of 22 questions of perceived personality traits and behaviors (Tools, 1980).
In terms of reliability, it is important that there is a maintained level of consistency that is applied within this test. Personality is a vast concept and important piece of people that for the sake of researcher and education are being tested for various reasons such as medical or professional. With the four types of reliability test-retest reliability, equivalent forms reliability, internal consistency reliability, and inter-rater reliability, the one that identifies the most with my selection would be inter-rater reliability (Phillips, 2024). I believe that it matches well with personality theory, and usually comprised of two providers independently grading and then correlating answers. This is also a test that is used in reference to the lives of others, is something that is observed by multiple people and directly affects the lives of the individual’s being researched.
In terms of validity, this is also an important component as it references the accuracy of interpretations or actions of the test scores (Phillips, 2024). With a concept of personality one of the worst things that can be done to a patient is to misdiagnose them. This could lead to a worsening of mental health, as well as affect the way they view themselves, and how others view them. It is key to note that all tests must go through a process of verification. The three types of validity consist of content validity, construct validity, and criterion validity, the one that I feel matches the closest with my test is construct validity. Construct Validity is a concept in which credible results are obtained by the assumption of existence that is based on patterns that have been previously established (Phillips, 2024). I believe this fits personality is it is not something that can be directly observed or seen. When you take into consideration of how or why one’s personality is perceived and expressed it is often through patterns or behaviors that have been previously identified.
They are able to coexist because, there should always be a combination of reliability and validity to be able to proven that your test will result in specific and accurate information and answers.
Based on the test I chose the assessor level would be, C, due to personality being a vast concept that should be studied with certain supporting psychological fields. Examples of this include individual differences, meaning not every individual is going to fit one mold, the psychology of adjustment, which is how people are able maintain their own needs along and how that interacts with the environment around them, as well as having experienced psychologists to bring out the full range and context of the test itself (Phillips, 2024). Meaning that psychologists can collaborate with others to make sure that their patient is accurately understood and diagnosed if need be.
The other relevant psychometric properties consist of,
Norm-referenced Testing. With this testing you would be observing the results of an individual who took the Hare Assessment and compared it to that of a group who was able to participate in the assessment. I believe that being able to compare and contrast these assessments would be beneficial in terms of we can interpret the results.
References:
Phillips , S. (2024, May). Week 2: Psychometrics. PSYC502: Tests and Measurements .
Phillips, S. (2024, May). Week 3: Ethics. PSYC502: Tests and Measurements .
Tools, P. (1980, January). Hare Psychopathy Checklist (original) (PCL-22). Psychology Tools. https://psychology-tools.com/test/pcl-22
